After the Kiev “Progroms”: The Ukraine risks becoming a Failed State

Igor Alexeev (RM) , – After violent pogroms in Kiev directly supported by the EU diplomats and officials, the Ukraine risks becoming a failed state. The political schemes of Brussels in Ukraine are clear: the EU is suffering from severe financial instability and needs new colonies.

The collapse of the Soviet Union opened new markets for European and transnational companies but by 2013 all market possibilities have been exhausted. In such situation, the Ukranian industry is perceived as a sweet spot. Brussels aims to surround itself with dependent countries possessing the natural and human resources that the EU can use for its own needs.

“Currently the Ukraine exports EUR 14.6 billion worth of goods to the EU and imports for EUR 23.8 billion, producing a 9.2 billion trade imbalance. In the area of investment, the imbalance is outright grotesque:

Image Copyright – StevoSinik, Croatia

EUR 2 billion from Ukraine, EUR 23.8 billion from the EU to the Ukraine (resulting in a fairly breathtaking, EUR 21.9 billion, imbalance). It is highly doubtful that German citizens are ready to compensate for Kiev’s imminent shortfall in income from the gas transit and its custom duties revenue.

Given those figures, even without the DCFTA, the economic linkage structure between the EU and Ukraine offers itself as a textbook study in external trade and investment dependence, writes József Böröcz in his comprehensive analysis of the EU-Ukraine association agreement (“Terms of Ukraine’s EU-Dependency”). Keeping in mind recent downgrades of Kiev’s credit rating by Moody’s and Fitch, the future of the country is unenviable.

The failure of the Vilnius summit made European diplomats join the opposition rallies in Kiev. Ugly scenes of violence shown by all mainstream media betrayed signs of a long-prepared strategy and seemed more like a pogrom than a revolution.

P.M. Mykola Azarov. Screen capture from Euronews

“Now moderate scenarios escape. The regime will not back down, because by doing so it will show weakness. Radical forces are prevailing among the protesters, and to compromise with them is impossible, given the lack of realistic scenarios for a compromise. The problem was detailed by Fyodor Lukyanmov in an article in Russia in Global Affairs, titled “No Good Scenarios for Ukraine”.

Does the European Union deliberately support radicals to destabilize the situation in the Ukraine? It is quite likely. Who is protesting on the streets of Kiev? The political engine of the progroms is located in parts of the western Ukraine which are known for widespread Nazi sympathies.

Today many politicians in Europe do not see it as a problem. The former prime minister of Poland, Jarosław Kaczyński, the Vice President of the European Parliament, Jacek Protasiewicz, and the former European Parliament President Jerzy Buzek, have come to Kiev to support the new generation of Nazi collaborationists on the barricades. “In L’viv, the Nazi support comes under the guise of Svoboda, a party calling for a Ukraine under the motto “one race, one nation, one Fatherland.”

Originally known as the Social-National Party, Svoboda is rooted in Nazi collaboration. Svoboda also honors “Ukrainian veterans” who fought with the Nazis against the Soviet Union during the Second World War in the Waffen SS-Galicia and the party is fighting against a threat which they describe as “Jew Communism.” The issue has been described in an article by Michael Goldfarb in the Global Post, titled “Ukraine’s nationalist party embraces Nazi ideology“.

There are, however, constructive and positive alternatives to EU-sponsored porgroms and political chaos, if the Europeans learn not to exclude Russia as if it was a somehow inferior country and they begin to include it as a full-fledged and equal partner. Brussels should understand that Russia is Europebecauseour cultural proximity is self-evident. A unified continental market with a capacity worth trillions of euros could be built “from Lisbon to Vladivostok”.

European politicians even had the gall to say that “the agreement would in no way adversely affect Russia’s interests”. Everyone understands this is an outright lie, and such statements hardly serve as a strong foundation for positive relations with Russia. That is why Moscow acted to defend its own interests.

But Russia is not opposed to the EU. On the contrary, Russia would like to build good relations with Europe, and it has proposed the Greater Europe project with that goal in mind.”

About the Author

Igor Alexeev - Igor Alekseev is an independent Russian journalist living in Moscow. He writes for Asia Times, Strategic Culture Foundation, Natural Gas Europe, and he is the Editor of Route Magazine. Igor Alekseev began contributing to nsnbc international in May 2013. He is covering Eurasian affairs, political economy and regional energy policy. A non-fiction reader, connoisseur and Chelsea FC fan. Igor Alexeev can be reached at editor@routemag.com